DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Subsistence Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Subsistence Report Evaluating the Subsistence Service Recovery: Spatial and Temporal Characterization of Prince William Sound Subsistence Harvest Activities Final Report Aaron Poe Chugach National Forest 3301 C Street Suite 300 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dr. Randy Gimblett BSE Bldg. Rm. 325 School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85712 Milo Burcham Cordova Ranger District Chugach National Forest P.O. Box 280 Cordova, Alaska 99574 December, 2010 “The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council administers all programs and activities free from discrimination based on race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, marital status,pregnancy, parenthood, or disability. The Council administers all programs and activities in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire further information, please write to: EVOS Trustee Council, 441 West 5th Avenue, Suite 500, Anchorage, Alaska 99501-2340; or O.E.O. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington D.C. 20240 2 Evaluating the Subsistence Service Recovery: Spatial and Temporal Characterization of Prince William Sound Subsistence Harvest Activities Final Report Aaron Poe Chugach National Forest 3301 C Street Suite 300 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dr. Randy Gimblett BSE Bldg. Rm. 325 School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85712 Milo Burcham Cordova Ranger District Chugach National Forest P.O. Box 280 Cordova, Alaska 99574 December, 2010 3 Evaluating the Subsistence Service Recovery: Spatial and Temporal Characterization of Prince William Sound Subsistence Harvest Activities Final Report Study History: This characterization of harvest patterns was initiated in 2008 to provide land and resource managers with insights into the recovery of the human service of subsistence harvest in the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS). It was initiated to define seasonal harvest distribution, relative use levels, and overlap with other human activities within Prince William Sound in order to evaluate how the recovering service of subsistence relates to other human activities within the region. It tiers to a suite of projects launched by the Chugach National Forest (CNF) to evaluate the dynamics of human use in the Sound as they relate to recovering injured resources and services. Abstract: We created a mapped distribution characterizing seasonal harvest activities of subsistence eligible households in Prince William Sound. Our analysis focused on data collected during interviews with 88 harvesting households in the communities of Chenega Bay, Cordova, Tatitlek and Whittier in 2009. Harvest efforts were reported for 24 individual resources and were summarized in terms of: 1) proportion of households using individual resources; 2) spatial extent of harvest; and 3) relative intensity of harvest effort. We also evaluated total reported use relative to recent use and found slight declines in overall household harvest effort. A spatial characterization of use intensity was compared to predicted distributions of recreation use activities throughout PWS and a weak positive correlation was detected between these activities during summer months. The results of this assessment will allow land and resource managers to make more informed decisions relative to protecting subsistence eligible harvesters, thus promoting the recovery of the Subsistence Human Service in the region that was injured by the oil spill. KeyWords: Prince William Sound, Subsistence, Household survey, Harvest, Alaska, Chenega Bay, Cordova, Tatitlek, Whittier Project Data: Data were collected using household surveys and entered into a database for further analysis. Upon completion of the project, harvest data pooled from all communities (devoid of any individual information) and summarized into GIS layers will be housed at the Chugach National Forest, Supervisor’s Office, Anchorage Alaska. Recommended Citation: Poe, A.J., H. R. Gimblett and M. Burcham. 2010. Evaluating the Subsistence Service Recovery: Spatial and Temporal Characterization of Prince William Sound Subsistence Harvest Activities, Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Restoration Project Final Report. USDA Forest Service, Chugach National Forest, Anchorage, Alaska 4 Table of Contents Page No. Figures and Tables 6 Executive Summary 8 Introduction 9 Relevance to 1994 Restoration Plan Goals and Scientific Priorities 11 Project Design 12 Objectives 12 Study Area 12 Methods 15 Household Surveys 15 Interview Methods 16 Analysis 16 Results 17 Household Surveys 17 Spatial Analysis 29 Discussion 36 Conclusions and Recommendations 39 Acknowledgments 40 Literature Cited 40 Appendices 43 5 List of Figures Page No. Figure 1 - Prince William Sound Study Area 13 Figure 2 - The vector of intended use change in number of 19 records (ie., polygons where used) of 24 resources by 88 households in Prince William Sound. Figure 3 - The vector of intended use change in number of 19 harvest records (ie., polygons where used) of four resources experiencing the greatest declines in household use in Prince William Sound. Figure 4 - Total harvest days invested annually in Prince William 21 Sound between ~2004-2008 by residents from Chenega Bay. Figure 5 - Total harvest days invested annually in Prince William 21 Sound between ~2004-2008 by residents from Cordova. Figure 6 - Total harvest days invested annually in Prince William 22 Sound between ~2004-2008 by residents from Tatitlek. Figure 7 - Total harvest days invested annually in Prince William 22 Sound between 2004-2008 by residents from Whittier. Figure 8 - Annual total of harvest days from Prince William Sound 25 Communities from January through December during the period from ~2004-2008. Figure 9 - Seasonal harvest day efforts for individual species 26 harvested by 88 households in Prince William Sound. Figure 10 - Fourteen sub-regions of Prince William Sound 28 identified by two or more households as areas they intend to use less as a result of competition with others. Figure 11 - Total number of reports (n=55) from respondents, 29 by species and community, who identified 37 unique sub-regions they now intend to harvest less due to competition with others in Prince William Sound. Figure 12 - Total annual harvest day density for sub-region 31 polygon units broken into four classes from lighter to darker representing low, medium, higher, with highest being highlighted in blue. Figure 13 - Total spring harvest day density for sub-region 32 polygon units broken into four classes from lighter to darker representing low, medium, higher, with highest being highlighted in blue. Figure 14 - Total summer harvest day density for sub-region 33 polygon units broken into four classes from lighter to darker representing low, medium, higher, with highest being highlighted in blue. Figure 15 - Total fall harvest day density for sub-region polygon 34 units broken into four classes from lighter to darker representing low, medium, higher, with highest being highlighted in blue. 6 Figure 16 - Total winter harvest day density for sub-region polygon 35 units broken into four classes from lighter to darker representing low, medium, higher, with highest being highlighted in blue. List of Tables Page No: Table 1 - The proportion of 88 households reporting use of a 18 resource through time and within the past five years (~2004-2008) in Prince William Sound. Table 2 - Annual harvest days reported by respondents from 20 four Prince William Sound communities by resource type between ~2004-2008. Table 3 - Average years of experience harvesting resources held 23 by respondents from four Prince William Sound Communities. Table 4 - Average history of experience in years of harvesting 23 individual resources held by 88 households from Prince William Sound. Table 5 - The seasonal density of harvest days/km2 reported 30 by respondents from 88 households in Prince William Sound. 7 Evaluating the Subsistence Service Recovery: Spatial and Temporal Characterization of Prince William Sound Subsistence Harvest Activities EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Chugach National Forest, as the major land-owning Federal Trustee in the Sound, plays an important role in the EVOS recovery process. One area of critical importance to Forest managers, which has received less attention by researchers, is the distribution, behavior, and experience of human users throughout the Sound and the impact of these users on EVOS recovering resources and services. A key recovering human service is subsistence harvest of resources by eligible PWS communities which include Chenega Bay, Cordova, Tatitlek and Whittier. Recreation use is increasing in the Sound, and there is concern that increased competition from commercial and independent recreation may be negatively impacting harvest activities from these communities through direct competition for resources. This competition could be coming directly through taking of resources by sport fishers and hunters, and also indirectly through displacement of subsistence harvesters from traditional harvest areas. We conducted interviews of 88 households in Chenega Bay (8), Cordova (35), Tatitlek (6) and Whittier (39) in 2009. We asked households to summarize their harvest activities within the Prince William Sound region in terms of resources
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WDFW Washington State Status Report for the Bald Eagle
    STATE OF WASHINGTON October 2001 WashingtonWashington StateState StatusStatus ReportReport forfor thethe BaldBald EagleEagle by Derek W. Stinson, James W. Watson and Kelly R. McAllister Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Wildlife Program WDFW 759 The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains a list of endangered, threatened and sensitive species (Washington Administrative Codes 232-12-014 and 232-12-011, Appendix I). In 1990, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission adopted listing procedures developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies (Washington Administrative Code 232-12-297, Appendix I). The procedures include how species listing will be initiated, criteria for listing and delisting, public review and recovery and management of listed species. The first step in the process is to develop a preliminary species status report. The report includes a review of information relevant to the species’ status in Washington and addresses factors affecting its status including, but not limited to: historic, current, and future species population trends, natural history including ecological relationships, historic and current habitat trends, population demographics and their relationship to long term sustainability, and historic and current species management activities. The procedures then provide for a 90-day public review opportunity for interested parties to submit new scientific data relevant to the draft status report and classification recommendation. During the 90-day review period, the Department held three public meetings to take comments and answer questions. The Department has now completed the final status report, listing recommendation and State Environmental Policy Act findings for presentation to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exchange of Water Between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska Recommended
    The exchange of water between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors Schmidt, George Michael Download date 27/09/2021 18:58:15 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/5284 THE EXCHANGE OF WATER BETWEEN PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND AND THE GULF OF ALASKA RECOMMENDED: THE EXCHANGE OF WATER BETWEEN PRIMCE WILLIAM SOUND AND THE GULF OF ALASKA A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE by George Michael Schmidt III, B.E.S. Fairbanks, Alaska May 197 7 ABSTRACT Prince William Sound is a complex fjord-type estuarine system bordering the northern Gulf of Alaska. This study is an analysis of exchange between Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska. Warm, high salinity deep water appears outside the Sound during summer and early autumn. Exchange between this ocean water and fjord water is a combination of deep and intermediate advective intrusions plus deep diffusive mixing. Intermediate exchange appears to be an annual phen­ omenon occurring throughout the summer. During this season, medium scale parcels of ocean water centered on temperature and NO maxima appear in the intermediate depth fjord water. Deep advective exchange also occurs as a regular annual event through the late summer and early autumn. Deep diffusive exchange probably occurs throughout the year, being more evident during the winter in the absence of advective intrusions. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Appreciation is extended to Dr. T. C. Royer, Dr. J. M. Colonell, Dr. R. T. Cooney, Dr. R.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing in the Cordova Area
    Southcentral Region Department of Fish and Game Fishing in the Cordova Area About Cordova Cordova is a small commercial fishing town (pop. 2,500) on the southeastern side of Prince William Sound, 52 air miles southeast of Valdez and 150 air miles southeast of Anchorage. The town can be reached only by air or by ferries. Check the Alaska Marine Highway website for more informa- tion about the ferries: www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs Alaska Natives originally settled the area around the Copper River Delta. The town of Cordova changed its name from Puerto Cordova in 1906 when the railroad was built to move copper ore. Commercial fishing has been a major industry The Scott River for Cordova since the 1940s, so please be careful around their boats and nets. The Division of Commercial Hotels, fishing charters, camping Fisheries offers a wealth of information on their website, For information about fishing charters, accommoda- including in-season harvest information at www.adfg. tions and other services in Cordova, contact the Chamber alaska.gov . of Commerce and Visitor’s Center at P.O. Box 99, Cordova, Bears are numerous in the Cordova area and anglers Alaska, 99574, (907) 424-7260 or cordovachamber.com. The should use caution when fishing salmon spawning areas. City of Cordova also runs an excellent website at www. Check the ADF&G website for the “Bear Facts” brochure, cityofcordova.net . or request one from the ADF&G Anchorage regional of- fice. Anglers who fillet fish along a river are encouraged to chop up the fish carcass and throw the pieces into fast Management of Alaska’s flowing water.
    [Show full text]
  • Prince William Sound Location File User's Guide
    Prince William Sound User’s Guide Welcome to the Location File for Prince William Sound, an embayment of the Gulf of Alaska, located in south-central Alaska. Prince William Sound is bordered on the west by the Kenai Peninsula; Montague Island and Hinchinbrook Island lie at the main entrance to the sound. Prince William Sound is well known as the location of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, which spilled nearly 11 million gallons of oil into its biologically rich waters. NOAA created Location Files for different U.S. coastal regions to help you use the General NOAA Oil Modeling Environment, GNOME. Each Location File contains information about local oceanographic conditions that GNOME uses to model oil spills in the area covered by that Location File. Each Location File also contains references (both print publications and Internet sites) to help you learn more about the location you are simulating. As you work with the Location File for Prince William Sound, GNOME will prompt you to: 1 Prince William Sound 1. Choose the model settings (start date and time, and run duration). 2. Input the wind conditions. GNOME will guide you through choosing the model settings and entering the wind conditions. Click the Help button anytime you need help setting up the model. Check the “Finding Wind Data” Help topic to see a list of web sites that publish wind data for this region. More information about GNOME and Location Files is available at http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/software/gnome/gnome.html . Technical Documentation Background Prince William Sound is one of the larger estuaries in North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska
    Geology of the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula Region, Alaska Including the Kenai, Seldovia, Seward, Blying Sound, Cordova, and Middleton Island 1:250,000-scale quadrangles By Frederic H. Wilson and Chad P. Hults Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3110 View looking east down Harriman Fiord at Serpentine Glacier and Mount Gilbert. (photograph by M.L. Miller) 2012 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................1 Geographic, Physiographic, and Geologic Framework ..........................................................................1 Description of Map Units .............................................................................................................................3 Unconsolidated deposits ....................................................................................................................3 Surficial deposits ........................................................................................................................3 Rock Units West of the Border Ranges Fault System ....................................................................5 Bedded rocks ...............................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Smaller Gulf of Alaska Communities: Cook Inlet/Prince William Sound Subgroup
    SMALLER GULF OF ALASKA COMMUNITIES: COOK INLET/PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND SUBGROUP Holdings of Limited Entry Permits, Sablefish Quota Shares, and Halibut Quota Shares Through 1997 and Data On Fishery Gross Earnings CFEC Report 98-SPCIPWS-N Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission 8800 Glacier Highway, Suite 109 Juneau, Alaska 99801 (907) 789-6160 Abstract: This report is one of a series of reports on Gulf of Alaska coastal communities that were prepared with funding provided by the Restricted Access Management Program (NMFS- RAM) of the National Marine Fisheries Service - Alaska Region. This report covers the holdings of restricted use-privileges by persons from the Cook Inlet/Prince William Sound subgroup of the Smaller Gulf of Alaska Communities. For the purposes of this report, the Cook Inlet/Prince William Sound subgroup includes the communities of Chenega, Chenega Bay, English Bay, Nanwalek, Ninilchik, Port Graham, Seldovia, Tatitlek and Tyonek. This report provides fishery-specific data on holdings of Alaska limited entry permits by persons from the Cook Inlet/Prince William Sound subgroup. There are tables that show the number of limited entry permits initially issued to persons from these communities, and the number of these permits held at year-end 1997. Time series data on limited entry permit holdings are also provided. Similarly, the report contains data on halibut and sablefish quota shares initially allocated to persons from these communities as well as quota shares held at year-end 1997. Quota shares are the basic use-privileges issued under the halibut and sablefish individual fishing quota (IFQ) programs. Time series data on quota share holdings are also provided.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake Subduction Zone Steven C
    Adv. Geophys. ms. Last saved: 2/12/2003 6:lO:OO PM 1 Crustal Deformation in Southcentral Alaska: The 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake Subduction Zone Steven C. Cohen Geodynamics Branch, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 2077 1 email: Steven.C.Cohen @ .nasa.gov; phone: 301-6 14-6466 Jeffrey T. Freymueller Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775 Outline: 1. Introduction 2. Tectonic, Geologic, and Seismologic Setting 3. Observed Crustal Motion 3.1 Coseismic Crustal Motion 3.2 Preseismic and Interseismic (pre-1964) Crustal Motion 3.3 Postseismic and Interseismic (post-1964) Crustal Motion 4. Models of Southcentral Alaska Preseismic and Postseismic Crustal Deformation 5. Conclusions 6. References Adv. Geophys. ms. Last saved: a1 a2003 6:lO:OO PM 2 1. Introduction The M, = 9.2 Prince William Sound (PWS) that struck southcentral Alaska on March 28, 1964, is one of the important earthquakes in history. The importance of this Great Alaska Earthquake lies more in its scientific than societal impact. While the human losses in the PWS earthquake were certainly tragic, the sociological impact of the earthquake was less than that of is earthquakes that have struck heavily populated locales. By contrast Earth science, particularly tectonophysics, seismology, and geodesy, has benefited enormously from studies of this massive earthquake. The early 1960s was a particularly important time for both seismology and tectonophysics. Seismic instrumentation and analysis techniques were undergoing considerable modernization. For example, the VELA UNIFORM program for nuclear test detection resulted in the deployment of the World Wide Standard Seismographic Network in the late 1950s and early 1960s (Lay and Wallace, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • CHENEGA BAY LODGING PROJECT Feasibility Study and Business Plan
    CHENEGA BAY LODGING PROJECT Feasibility Study and Business Plan November 2007 December 2007 A plan developed by Chenega Heritage, Inc. with assistance from Agnew::Beck Consulting. This plan was produced in part with Mini-Grant Assistance funds made available through the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development and the Denali Commission. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................1 Purpose of this Report..........................................................................................................................1 Summary of Conclusions ......................................................................................................................1 LOCAL CONDITIONS ...........................................................................................................................7 Location....................................................................................................................................................7 History ......................................................................................................................................................7 Climate......................................................................................................................................................8 Infrastructure...........................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Economic-Impacts-Of-AMHS
    January 2016 The Economic Impacts of the Alaska Marine Highway System Prepared for Alaska Marine Highway System Prepared by January 2016 The Economic Impacts of the Alaska Marine Highway System Prepared for Alaska Marine Highway System Pantone 3165 C 100 M 53 Y 53 K 33 Prepared by R 0 G 78 B 89 Tint at 60% Pantone 7751 C 22 M 24 Y 85 K 0 R 205 G 181 B 75 Pantone 175 www.mcdowellgroup.net C 35 M 81 Y 86 K 39 R 118 G 54 B 37 Tint at 70% Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction and Methodology .............................................................................................. 5 AMHS Overview ...................................................................................................................... 6 AMHS History ......................................................................................................................... 6 AMHS Vessels ......................................................................................................................... 7 AMHS Service and Traffic........................................................................................................ 8 AMHS Employment and Payroll ........................................................................................... 14 Employment in Alaska .......................................................................................................... 14 Payroll in Alaska ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Exxon Valdez Incident
    PT-13: Coastal and Ocean Engineering ENGI.8751 Undergraduate Student Forum Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Memorial University, St. john’s, NL, Canada MARCH, 2013 Paper Code. (PT-13 - Halley) Exxon Valdez Incident John Halley Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John’s, NL, Canada [email protected] ABSTRACT The Exxon Valdez was an oil tanker owned by the ExxonMobil Shipping Company, which gained its infamy after running aground in Prince William Sound spilling more than 11 million galleons (approximately 258,000 barrels) of crude oil [1]. It is currently operating under the name Oriental Nicety, and is owned by Hong Kong Bloom Shipping Ltd. In the early hours of March 24th, 1989 the vessel struck Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The oil impacted over 1,100 miles of non-continuous coastline, making the Exxon Valdez the largest oil spill in U.S. history [2]. Exxon and the U.S. Coast Guard began a massive cleanup effort that included over 11,000 personnel, 1,400 vessels, and 85 aircrafts [2]. The spill affected one of the nations most vulnerable ecosystems, which included a national forest, four national wildlife refuges, five state parks, 3 national parks, four state critical habitat areas, and a state game sanctuary. Total toll on marine wildlife included approximately 300 harbour seals, 2,800 sea otters, and between 250,000 and 500,000 seabirds [3]. The remote location, the large spill size, and the character of the oil spill tested spill preparedness and response capabilities. Government and industry response plans proved to be completely insufficient to maintain an oil spill of this magnitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on Birds: Comparisons of Pre- and Post-Spill Surveys in Prince William Sound, Alaska ’
    The Condor 99:299-3 13 D The Cooper Ornithological Society 1997 EFFECTS OF THE EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL ON BIRDS: COMPARISONS OF PRE- AND POST-SPILL SURVEYS IN PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND, ALASKA ’ STEPHENM. MUFZHY AND ROBERT H. DAY ABR, Inc., P.O. Box 80410, Fairbanks, AK 99708, e-mail: [email protected] JOHN A. WIENS Departmentof Biology, Colorado State University,Fort Collins, CO 80523 KEITH R. PARKER Data Analysis Group, 5100 Chern, Creek Road, Cloverdale, CA 95425 Abstract. We used data from pre- and post-spill surveys to assessthe effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill on the abundanceand distribution of birds in Prince William Sound, Alaska. We conductedpost-spill surveys during mid-summer (1989-1991) in 10 bays that had been surveyed prior to the spill (1984-1985) and that had experienceddifferent levels of initial oiling from the spill (unoiled to heavily oiled). We evaluated whether there were changesin overall abundanceacross all bays between the pre-spill and post-spill sampling periods, and changesin abundancein unoiled/lightly oiled bays versus moderately/heavily oiled bays that would suggestoiling impacts. Of 12 taxa examined for changesin overall abundance, 7 showed no significant change, 2 (Bald Eagle and Glaucous-winged Gull) increasedin abundance,and 3 (Red-necked Grebe, Pelagic Cormorant, and Pigeon Guille- mot) decreasedin abundanceduring all three post-spill years. Of the 11 taxa examined for differences in use of oiled versus unoiled habitats, 7 showed no significant response, 1 (Black-legged Kittiwake) exhibited a positive responseto oiling, and 3 (Pelagic Cormorant, Black Oystercatcher,and Pigeon Guillemot) exhibited negative responsesto initial oiling.
    [Show full text]
  • SEASONAL ABUNDANCE, MOVEMENTS, and FOOD a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Stanislaus and Moss La
    SEASONAL ABUNDANCE, MOVEMENTS, AND FOOD HABITS OF HARBOR SEALS (PHOCA VITULINA RICHARDS!) INELKHORNSLOUGH,CAL~ORNIA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Stanislaus and Moss Landing Marine Laboratories In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Marine Science By Dion Seth Oxman May, 1995 Copyright © 1995 by Dion Seth Oxman 11 ABSTRACT Harbor seals were counted at least twice per month at haul-out sites in Elkhorn Slough during 1991. Although there was no seasonal variation in abundance, numbers had increased three fold since 1984. Eight juvenile harbor seals (5 females and 3 males) were caught in Elkhorn Slough and fitted with radio transmitters to study movements and activity patterns. Radio­ tagged individuals were usually found resting ashore inside the slough during the day (mean = 94% of the time), and diving in Monterey Bay during nighttime (mean = 90% of the time). At night, tagged harbor seals moved as far north as Sunset Beach, but usually were found off Moss Landing. Dives in Monterey Bay (mean = 4.32 min, S.D. 2.35 min) were significantly greater in duration than those performed in Elkhorn Slough (mean = 1.80 min, S.D. = 1.50 min). Prey hard parts found in harbor seal feces collected from Elkhorn Slough indicated harbor seals consumed mostly benthic species, including octopus {Octopus sp. ), spotted cusk-eel (Chilara taylor£), and flatfishes, throughout the year. Rockfishes (Sebastes sp.), and other pelagic species were eaten when they became abundant during summer. There was no significant similarity (PSI's < 0.13) in species composition between seal diet and otter trawls conducted in Elkhorn Slough, indicating seals fed mostly in the bay at night.
    [Show full text]